Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35406441›Full record

ReviewCancers2022

Harnessing Liquid Biopsies to Guide Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.

Shadma Fatima, Yafeng Ma, Azadeh Safrachi, Sana Haider, Kevin J Spring, Fatemeh Vafaee, Kieran F Scott, Tara L Roberts, Therese M Becker, Paul de Souza

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. LiqBioer: a manually curated database of cancer biomarkers in body fluid.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2022
    Article
  11. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Shadma FatimaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.
Yafeng MaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0522-8771
Azadeh SafrachiSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.
Sana HaiderDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.
Kevin J SpringDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0601-924X
Fatemeh VafaeeSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2031, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7521-2417
Kieran F ScottDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6012-4107
Tara L RobertsDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9266-0943
Therese M BeckerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5636-9902
Paul de SouzaDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ingham Institute of Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, NSW 2170, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7380-1170

Funding

Ingham Institute 2021 Narellan Rotary grant
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunotherapy (IO), involving the use of immune checkpoint inhibition, achieves improved response-rates and significant disease-free survival for some cancer patients. Despite these beneficial effects, there is poor predictability of response and substantial rates of innate or acquired resistance, resulting in heterogeneous responses among patients. In addition, patients can develop life-threatening adverse events, and while these generally occur in patients that also show a tumor response, these outcomes are not always congruent. Therefore, predicting a response to IO is of paramount importance. Traditionally, tumor tissue analysis has been used for this purpose. However, minimally invasive liquid biopsies that monitor changes in blood or other bodily fluid markers are emerging as a promising cost-effective alternative. Traditional biomarkers have limitations mainly due to difficulty in repeatedly obtaining tumor tissue confounded also by the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of tumours. Liquid biopsy has the potential to circumvent tumor heterogeneity and to help identifying patients who may respond to IO, to monitor the treatment dynamically, as well as to unravel the mechanisms of relapse. We present here a review of the current status of molecular markers for the prediction and monitoring of IO response, focusing on the detection of these markers in liquid biopsies. With the emerging improvements in the field of liquid biopsy, this approach has the capacity to identify IO-eligible patients and provide clinically relevant information to assist with their ongoing disease management.

Indexed as

biomarkerscirculating tumor cellsctDNAimmune cellsimmune checkpoint inhibitorimmunotherapyliquid biopsymutationsneutrophil to lymphocyte ratiotumor mutational burden

Identifiers

PMID35406441
PMCPMC8997025

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.